Abstract
Everyday, chemistry teachers all over the world are challenged by the question: Should I explain the chemistry content in a frontal mode using the blackboard, or am I able to apply methods to activate the students learning on their own terms? This chapter is based on the premise that learning processes should be based as much as possible on student-centred activities (hands-on and minds-on). A justification for more thorough student-active learning in the chemistry classroom is derived from the theory of social constructivism. Evidence for the positive effects of more student-active classrooms and cooperative learning will be discussed. This discussion will be illustrated by examples from chemistry education regarding how to activate students ' thinking, to engage them into a cooperative mode of learning, or to use e.g. drama and role-play in the chemistry classroom.
Access provided by Autonomous University of Puebla. Download to read the full chapter text
Chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Keywords
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
References
Aronson, E., Stephan, C., Sikes, J., Blaney, N., & Snapp, M. (1978). The jigsaw classroom. Beverly Hills: Sage.
Bodner, G. M. (1986). Constructivism: A theory of knowledge. Journal of Chemical Education, 63, 873–878.
Buzan, T. (1996). The mind map book. New York: Penguin.
Byers, B., & Eilks, I. (2009). The need for innovation in higher chemistry education – A pedagogical justification. In I. Eilks & B. Byers (eds.), Innovative methods for teaching and learning chemistry in higher education (pp. 5–22). London: RSC Publishing.
Chen, D. Z. (2010). A new method for studying the Periodic System based on a Kohonen neural network. Journal of Chemical Education, 87, 433–434.
Craft, J., & Miller, J. (2007). Unlocking the atom. The Science Teacher, 74, 24–29.
De Vries, D. L. & Slavin, R. E. (1978). Teams-Games-Tournament: Review of ten classroom experiments. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 12, 28–38.
Driver, R., & Oldham, V. (1986). A constructivist approach to curriculum development. Studies in Science Education, 13, 22–105.
Eilks, I. (2005). Experiences and reflections about teaching atomic structure in a jigsaw classroom in lower secondary school chemistry lessons. Journal of Chemical Education, 82, 313–320.
Eilks, I., & Bolte, C. (2008). Chemie Interaktiv. Berlin: Cornelsen.
Eilks, I., & Leerhoff, G. (2001). A jigsaw classroom – Illustrated by the teaching of atomic structure. Science Education International, 12(3), 15–20.
Feierabend, T., & Eilks, I. (2011). Teaching the societal dimension of chemistry along a socio-critical and problem-oriented lesson plan on the use of bioethanol. Journal of Chemical Education, 88, 1250–1256.
Fisher, R. (2005). Teaching children to think. Celtenham: Nelson Thornes.
Frey, K. (1982). The project method. Weinheim: Beltz.
Hertz-Lazarowitz, R. (1992). Understanding interactive behaviors: Looking at six mirrors of the classroom. In R. Hertz-Lazarowitz & N. Miller (eds.), Interaction in cooperative groups: The theoretical anatomy of group learning (pp. 71–101). Cambridge: Cambridge University.
Hodson, D., & Hodson, J. (1998). From constructivism to social constructivism: A Vygotskyan perspective on teaching and learning science. School Science Review, 79 (289), 33–41.
Hofstein, A., & Kesner, M. (2006). Industrial chemistry and school chemistry: Making chemistry studies more relevant. International Journal of Science Education, 28, 1017–1039.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1999). Learning together and alone: Cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Kagan, S. (1994). Cooperative learning. San Clemente: Kagan.
Khalil, M., Lazarowitz, M., & Hertz-Lazarowitz, R. (2009). A conceptual model (The six mirrors of the classroom) and its application to teaching and learning about microorganisms. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18, 85–100.
Lazarowitz, R., & Hertz-Lazarowitz, R (1998). Co-operative learning in the science curriculum. In B. J. Fraser & K. G. Tobin (eds.), International handbook of science education (pp. 449–470). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Lazarowitz, R., & Karsenty, G. (1990). Cooperative learning and student academic achievement, process skills, learning environment and self-esteem in 10th grade biology. In S. Sharan (ed.), Cooperative learning, theory and research (pp. 123–149). New York: Praeger.
Lyman, F. T. (1981). The responsive classroom discussion: The inclusion of all students. In A. Anderson (ed.), Mainstreaming digest (pp. 109–113). College Park: University of Maryland.
Marks, R., Otten, J., & Eilks, I. (2010). Writing news spots about chemistry – A way to promote students' competencies in communication and evaluation. School Science Review, 92(339), 99–108.
Mills, J. A. (2000). Control: A history of behavioral psychology. New York: University Press.
Novak, J. D., & Gowin, D. B. (1996). Learning how to learn. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Ozden, M. (2007). The value of drama and game modelling in science teaching: A new approach for learning chemical bond (ionic and covalent bond) concept with an atom model using dramatization. The Chemical Education Journal, 9(2).
Peterson, L. R., & Peterson, M. J. (1959). Short-term retention of individual verbal items. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58, 193–198.
Regis, A., Albertazzi, P. G., & Roletto, E. (1996). Concept maps in chemistry education. Journal of Chemical Education, 73, 1084–1088.
Reid, N. (2000). The presentation of chemistry logically driven or applications-led? Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 1, 381–392.
Rico, G. (2000). Writing the natural way. Westminster: Penguin Putnam.
Sciencelearn (2012). Drama in the microworld. www.sciencelearn.org.nz/Contexts/Fire/Teaching-and-Learning-Approaches/Drama-in-the-microworld.
Sharan, S. (ed.) (2004). Handbook of cooperative learning methods. Westport: Praeger.
Sharan, S., & Hertz-Lazarowitz, R. (1980). A group investigation method of cooperative learning in the classroom. In: S. Sharan, P. Hare, C. Webb, & R. Hertz-Lazarowitz (eds.), Cooperation in education (pp. 14–46). Provo: BYU Press.
Skinner, B. F. (1976). About behavioursm. New York: MacMillan.
Slavin, R. E. (1978). Student Teams and Achievement Divisions. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 12, 39–49.
Stanfield, R. B. (2002). The workshop book: From individual creativity to group action, Chapter 7. Gabriola Island: New Society.
Van Rens, L., Van der Schee, J., & Pilot, A. (2009). Teaching molecular diffusion using an inquiry approach. Diffusion activities in a secondary school inquiry-learning community. Journal of Chemical Education, 86, 1437–1441.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge: Harvard University.
Witteck, T., & Eilks, I. (2005). Writing up an experiment cooperatively. School Science Review, 86(317), 107–110.
Witteck, T., & Eilks, I. (2006). Max Sour Ltd. – Open experimentation and problem solving in a cooperative learning company. School Science Review, 88(323), 95–102.
Witteck, T., Most, B., Kienast, S., & Eilks, I. (2007). A lesson plan on separating matter based on the learning company approach – A motivating frame for self-regulated and open lab-work in introductory chemistry lessons. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 7, 108–119.
Witteck, T., Most, B., Leerhoff, G., & Eilks, I. (2004). Co-operative learning on the internet using the ball bearing method (Inside-Outside-Circle). Science Education International, 15, 209–223.
Wittrock, M. C. (1989). Generative processes of comprehension. Educational Psychologist, 24, 325–344.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Sense Publishers
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Eilks, I., Prins, G.T., Lazarowitz, R. (2013). How to Organise the Chemistry Classroom in a Student-Active Mode. In: Eilks, I., Hofstein, A. (eds) Teaching Chemistry – A Studybook. SensePublishers, Rotterdam. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6209-140-5_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6209-140-5_7
Publisher Name: SensePublishers, Rotterdam
Online ISBN: 978-94-6209-140-5
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)